The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1887-01-12
To the Associated Press.
Supreme Court Decisions.

To the Associated Press.
Supreme Court Decisions.
WASHINGTON, Jan. 10-A decision was
rendered by the Supreme Court OF the
United States to-day in the patent case of
Stewart Hartshorn, appellant, against the
Saginaw Barrel Company; appeal from the
United States Circuit Court for the District
OF Michigan. This was suit to restrain the
alleged infringement of two reissued patents
and one original patent granted 10 the APP
pellant for improvements in window-shade
rollers. The court holds that the two re-
issued patents are void, and that the original
patent has not been infringed. The decree
of the Circuit Court is therefore affirmed.
4 decision was rendered in the novel and
interesting international case of the King of
the Belgians, by Charles Mali, Consul, against
the keeper Of the common jail Of Hudson
County, New jersey. On the 10th of last Oc-
tober there occurred on board of the Belgian
ship Noordland, lying at her dock IN Jersey
City, fight between her sailors, in the course
Of which one of them, named Wil0enhus
stabbed and killed another, named Frigens
both Belgian subjects The police suthori-
ties arrested the murderer and the two other
sailors who were witnesses of the fight, and
imprisoned them in the Jersey City Jail.
The Belgian Consul, acting under instruc-
tIons from his Government demanded the
release of all the prisoners, on the ground
that the crime was committed within the
jurisdiction Of the kingdom of Belgium, and
that, under the law of nations he, as Con-
sui, had sole aNthority in the premises
The demand for the release OF the prison
ers was refused, whereupon the Consul sued
out writ OF habeas corpus, and upon the
dismissal of that writ by the United States
Circuit Court be brought the lease to this
court by appeal.
Justice Waite, speaking for the court in
this case, said: ''The principle which
=
which disturb only the peace Of the ship or
those On board are to be dealt with exclu-
sively by the sovereignty of the home of the
ship; but these which disturb the repose of
the people on shore may be suppressed, and,
if need be, the offenders punished by the
proper authorities of the local jurisdiction.
1t NAV not be easy at all times to determine
to which OF the two jurisdictions a pzrticu-
lar act of disorder belongs. Much will un-
doubtedly depend on the attending circum.
stances of the particular case, but all must
concede that felonious homicide Is q subject
for local jurisdiction, and if the proper au-
thOrities are proceeding with the case in g
regular manner, the Consul has no right to
interfere 10 prevent IT,"
Tie decree of the Circuit Court dismissing
the writ of habeas corpus is affirmed.
A decision was rendered IN the case Of the
s.. 1ammany WateT-wOrks Company ct al.
VS.. the New Orleans Water-wOrks Company.
This wss a suit brought by the New Orleans
Water-works Company vs.. the st. Tammany
WateT-works Company to have the latter en-
joined from infringing the. exclusive priv
ileFes granted to the New Orleans Water
works Company by It's act of incorporation.
| In the opinion OF this court IL is impossible
to distinguish this case in principle from
that OF the 'New Orleans Water-works Com
pany Rivers" Upon the authority of that
case it must be held that the carrying out by
the appellant Of its scheme for system of
water-works in New Orleans would be in vio-
latiOn of the contract rights of the appellee,
and that the State Constitution of 1879 so
far as it assumes to withdraw the exclusive
| privileges granted to the appellee, is incon-
sistent with the clause of the National Con-
stitution f0rbidding State from passing
any law impairiDg the obligations of con-
tracts. The decree of the court below is af-
| iiImed.
a decision was also rendered in the case
of Edward Kirby, executor, against the
Lake Shore and Michigan Southern Railroad
Company, the New York Central Railroad
Company and others; appeal from the Cir
cult Court OF the United States for the
Southern District of New York. The object
OF this suit is to obtain decree setting aside,
| on the ground of fraud certain settlements
Of accounts had by the firm of J. 7. & G. ID.
Alexander & Co., with the several railroad
corporations. The railroad company main
tanned that suit was barred by the statute of
II
this view on the ground that the statute be-
gansSo run from the time when the alleged
! fraud was committed. This court is of
opinion that the lower court erred in hold
ing that the statute of limitations began 20
run from the time when the fraud was COM
mitted and not from the time when it was
discovered. This court holds that in the
case of concealed fraud the statute does not
begin to<un until the fraud has been dis
covered 1t holds. however, that this suit
was not brought in time even after the dis
covery of the fraud and upon the most lib-
eral construction of the statute. The decree
OF the Circuit Court is therefore affirmed
At the conclusion of the reading of opin-
ions Mr.. Chief Justice Waite said in relation
to submission of cases under the twentieth
rule: 'It is proper 10 call the attention of
the bar TO the practical operation of a rule
which was adopted for the convenience of
parties without being inconvenient to the
court. During this term there have been sub
mitted under the rule fifty cases, and of these
thirty-oDe came in during the last week, the
ninety days having expired on Saturday last
Had they been submitted ratably es the term
progressed they could all have been disposed
OF without interfering materially with the
current business and without being at all
burdensome TO the court. As it is, we are
oppressed with a great accumulation OF this
kind OF business in the time OF the term
when we have q large number OF other cases
under consideration. Unless the practice is
changed we shall be compelled to abolish
the rule or make special order in reference
to its administration"